Hit by Drunk Driver
Race Director
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 15,049
Likes: 1,613
From: Holly Springs NC
St. Jude Donor '16-'17,'22,'24
True but your collision picks up the difference up to the deductible. So all the OP would be out would be deductible. Depending on how his policy is written and who wrote it, even part of the deductible may be covered, but not all of it.
Pro
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 607
Likes: 9
From: Sandy Eggo, California
Technically speaking if there was distance between him hitting you and then hitting the truck, it is considered two separate accidents. Since your crash occurred first his insurance is responsible for your crash first. Also the 15k limit is probably 15k per crash. If the police did their job right and were not lazy, they would have written two crash reports. Especially as you describe it. I get the picture that he hit you and then fled the scene in an attempt to escape. If he came to a stop after hitting you then took off then that's most certainly two crashes. If he hit you then continued controlled driving and subsequently hit the truck, that's two crashes. If he hit you and slid out of control a short distance and struck the truck, that is one crash. If the police wrote two crash reports then you get all 15k. If they didn't then you can sue the insurance company and get a judge to declare the crashes as separate.
The DUI driver would be Party #1 on the report. (The party most at fault.) The OP would be Party #2, and the truck driver would be Party #3. All on the same collision report.
To have two separate collisions, and two separate reports, the situation would have to have "stabilized" (meaning all motion had stopped) after the first two vehicles collided. For a second collision, the third vehicle (the truck) would have to have crashed into the first already stopped and stabilized accident scene.
If there is only one police report, then no one was being lazy, it was done correctly.
Instructor
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
From: Guntersville Alabama
Unfortunately, it's NOT two separate collisions. It's considered by the SWITERS collision manual to be only one accident. The DUI driver hitting the third vehicle (The truck) is considered just a continuation of the fist original collision.
The DUI driver would be Party #1 on the report. (The party most at fault.) The OP would be Party #2, and the truck driver would be Party #3. All on the same collision report.
To have two separate collisions, and two separate reports, the situation would have to have "stabilized" (meaning all motion had stopped) after the first two vehicles collided. For a second collision, the third vehicle (the truck) would have to have crashed into the first already stopped and stabilized accident scene.
If there is only one police report, then no one was being lazy, it was done correctly.
The DUI driver would be Party #1 on the report. (The party most at fault.) The OP would be Party #2, and the truck driver would be Party #3. All on the same collision report.
To have two separate collisions, and two separate reports, the situation would have to have "stabilized" (meaning all motion had stopped) after the first two vehicles collided. For a second collision, the third vehicle (the truck) would have to have crashed into the first already stopped and stabilized accident scene.
If there is only one police report, then no one was being lazy, it was done correctly.
RS
Last edited by Hombre; Oct 11, 2014 at 12:34 AM.
Racer
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 400
Likes: 28
From: St. Paul (smokey!) MN
Years ago I learned an interesting tidbit. Semi backed into the front of my car (not a Corvette). I had collision coverage, $1000 deductible. The damage estimate was barely over 1000. The other guy's insurance denied that he covered him, so I went to mine.
They cut me a check for the difference between the estimate and my deductible and said ok, we will take care of the rest. They said that if the damage hadn't been high enough to pay on the claim, they would have done NOTHING.
Something to think about if debating about dropping collision coverage. If you have it, your insurance company should hande it for you. If you don't, you are on your own.
For the OP, the driver is liable for ALL the damage, under insured or not. It will just be harder to collect on it.
They cut me a check for the difference between the estimate and my deductible and said ok, we will take care of the rest. They said that if the damage hadn't been high enough to pay on the claim, they would have done NOTHING.
Something to think about if debating about dropping collision coverage. If you have it, your insurance company should hande it for you. If you don't, you are on your own.
For the OP, the driver is liable for ALL the damage, under insured or not. It will just be harder to collect on it.
Drifting
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,923
Likes: 427
From: Dunedin Florida
I LOVE THIS FORUM! Crosis -- I took what you said about this should be handled as two separate accidents and call the insurance company back and explained what happen and they agreed that it is definitely 2 separate accidents and now I will be taken care of without worries of shortages. I was the first car he hit and he drove off and hit another vehicle 200 yards away. I appreciate all of your input and sorry for those who lost a hell-of-a lot more than I in an accident. Thanks again for each of your input. You guys 
Drifting
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,923
Likes: 427
From: Dunedin Florida
Unfortunately, it's NOT two separate collisions. It's considered by the SWITERS collision manual to be only one accident. The DUI driver hitting the third vehicle (The truck) is considered just a continuation of the fist original collision.
The DUI driver would be Party #1 on the report. (The party most at fault.) The OP would be Party #2, and the truck driver would be Party #3. All on the same collision report.
To have two separate collisions, and two separate reports, the situation would have to have "stabilized" (meaning all motion had stopped) after the first two vehicles collided. For a second collision, the third vehicle (the truck) would have to have crashed into the first already stopped and stabilized accident scene.
If there is only one police report, then no one was being lazy, it was done correctly.
The DUI driver would be Party #1 on the report. (The party most at fault.) The OP would be Party #2, and the truck driver would be Party #3. All on the same collision report.
To have two separate collisions, and two separate reports, the situation would have to have "stabilized" (meaning all motion had stopped) after the first two vehicles collided. For a second collision, the third vehicle (the truck) would have to have crashed into the first already stopped and stabilized accident scene.
If there is only one police report, then no one was being lazy, it was done correctly.
Not in my state and apparently not in the OPs state. You should get that changed in your state.
Instructor
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 225
Likes: 4
From: Missouri
Had an incident where the driver of a truck was to cheap to replace his bald tires on a dually. One of the rear tires blew out and hit my car causing $1300 damage. We pulled over, I asked for his insurance. He responded "what for?" I explained he said I ran into his tire then left. I got his license plate, pictures of him pics of his tire and called the state patrol. The patrolman was very nice about the situation however would not pursue charges for leaving the scene. I had to turn it in on my insurance. I am only out $100 and have to spend a day restriping my hood but it is the principle. My insurance has no interest in pursuing his for such a small amount. My advice, get even!
